The report that has just been declassified might really change the narrative around the Democrats’ assertion that Russia sought to help Donald Trump during the 2016 election. It’s interesting, actually—Obama’s administration didn’t point this out when they were trying to portray Putin’s intentions as beneficial towards Trump.
According to the House Intelligence Committee’s report released on Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin was aware of the Democratic National Committee’s worries regarding Hillary Clinton’s health during her campaign.
The report, dated September 2020, claims that the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service had access to DNC communications stating that Clinton was experiencing “psycho-emotional issues,” which included erratic anger and, somewhat humorously, described her as being very “thirsty for power.” There’s mention of her needing “heavy tranquilizers” while she was worried about her chances in the election.
Back then, some significant figures in the Democratic Party, including President Obama, reportedly felt that the state of Clinton’s health could have a “serious negative impact” on her campaign.
Glen Beck, co-founder of Blaze Media, expressed in a post that the documents released by Tulsi Gabbard show that it was actually Clinton who was in a compromised position in 2016, not Trump. He raises a fair point too: if the Russians really wanted to undermine Trump, why wouldn’t they have leaked this information? Beck suggests that Russia’s strategy was based on the belief that Clinton would likely win and, knowing her vulnerabilities, they chose not to exploit them.
Sarah Bedford, a research editor at the Washington Examiner, echoed a similar sentiment. She noted that while Russia did gather information indicating Clinton might have been in a mental and physical health crisis, they didn’t reveal it. This contrasts strikingly with the narrative that portrayed Putin as someone who wanted to aid Trump.
I think it leaves you pondering—what were the real dynamics behind Russian actions during that election? There seems to be a contradiction in the motives attributed to both Clinton and Trump. It feels a bit like a complex puzzle that doesn’t quite fit together neatly.
